But Scripture and tradition do contradict each other. Matthew 1:24-25 says pretty specifically that Mary and Joseph did have sex, after Jesus was born.
Notice that the passage does not say “he did not consummate their marriage”, it says when he consummated their marriage.
If I say “my wife and I did not have sex until after we were married”, no reasonable person would then conclude that my wife has remained a virgin for the last thirty-five years.
Regards,
Shodan
That’s a lot more polite than what I told one of those theologians. But then, we were in his living room, not in GQ 
Is Matthew 1:24-25 the only place that directly states they they consummated their marriage? If so, might we regard that singular mention in the same vein as another of his unique stories: Matthew 27:51-53?
Matthew also quotes Jesus as saying “I am with you always, until the end of the age”. I certainly wouldn’t conclude that Jesus intended to abandone his followers after the end of the age.
If your doctor tells you “you need to start exercising every 2 days until your resting heart rate is lowered to 60”, no one would conclude you can stop exercising after that point.
Which says:
So better than plain day labourer, perhaps, but still not definitively a carpenter. Builder, craftsman, workman.
Only occurs twice in the gospels in the same context, same quote?
So would the passage instead imply “his father was a smart man, why does he seem so dumb?”
Certainly Judaism and Islam have more in common with each other, theologically, than either has with Christianity. Though of course one might still say that Christianity and Judaism are very similar, if comparing, say, to Hinduism.
On the “Tekton” question, I’m unclear why it really matters. Whether Joseph was working with wood, stone, or metal, he was still working with his hands, in an occupation that was unlikely to be educated (outside of the probably-ironic idiom of “carpenter son of a carpenter” for a scholar).
And on the “words for ‘brother’”, question, what word is used for the relationship between Mary and Elizabeth? That, too, is often rendered in English as “sister”, but they were far enough apart in age that that’s highly unlikely (Mary being only just of marrying age, and Elizabeth being so old that she was thought to be post-menopausal).
Actually both those phrases imply an end date. Giving a start date implies even more strongly that something started happening, after that date. Abandonment, no - a change in the relationship (i.e. being in heaven), yes. Stop exercising, no - going to maintenance, yes.
Start having sex after a certain date, yes. Don’t have sex even after a certain date, no.
Regards,
Shodan
Does the “reasonable person” know you, personally? 
Actually, I always thought it meant that things were going to be so different at the end of the age, there’d be such a major reboot, Jesus as the disciples knew him wouldn’t exist-- and the disciples might be radically different as well, so they wouldn’t need Jesus to lead them anymore.
If that’s what the doctor says, that’s what he means. IME, doctors say something like “You need to begin exercising with the goal of lowering your resting heartrate to 60.”
It doesn’t really matter what it means exactly. That’s not the point of it. The point is, that in the original story, when it was being bandied about in Aramaic, probably went something like
“Can you believe what Jesus is up to? How could an ordinary guy from our town build a following like that in Jerusalem? Amazing.”
“I’ll say it’s amazing. Who but the carpenter son of a carpenter could explain it?”
Meaning, it would take a very wise man to explain this bizarre situation.
But when the story starts to circulate among Greek speakers who don’t have the “son of a carpenter” idiom, it got confused with there somehow being a literal carpenter and his son involved, and eventually, they became Joseph and Jesus.
What makes you think I know any reasonable people?
When the topic comes up, my wife just shrugs and says, “Well, he does his best, considering” and we move on to other topics.
Regards,
Shodan
I have to disagree with this statement.
It’s true that a mored husband, one who rebelliously denies conjugal attention to the wife, has left himself open to the wife’s exercise of a demand for divorce. But that’s not the only case of this being true. There are many other reasons – one that comes to mind is the husband who has undertaken a trade that makes him physically repulsive, such as having a body stench or smell. Many (admittedly not all) authorities say that beatings of the wife (if for no good reason) also allows the wife a divorce.
Why is this hard to understand? We don’t ask them for favors, we ask them to pray for us to God. Just like you would ask a fellow believer to pray for you to God.
I think this is an important point to reiterate. In general, the Christians into perpetual virginity are also the ones who lean on tradition and generally are not into the Bible as 100% history.
So if the Bible says “brothers and sisters” and the best translations say that means honest to goodness full brothers and sisters, but tradition says ‘always virgin’, well, tradition can trump scripture.
But I think Catholics believe that saints are more than just “fellow believers.” They “have the ear of the deity,” so to speak.
I guess an important point to remember is that the Catholic Church (and also the Eastern Church, and to the extent that the Anglicans have never quite cut the cord, them too), existed BEFORE the bible. The Church came into being around the 5th century (and was actually part of the East/West schism), while the traditions that the Catholic and Orthodox lay claims to, and roots in, go back about three centuries earlier. And yes, I know various things that made it into the bible were being used as study texts, but there was no single thing that Luther could have pointed to and said “Sola Scriptura,” which has been the attitude of most protestants, who venerate the document (in translation, yet) if anything, even more than the Jews venerate the Torah.
I forget this about the Catholic & Orthodox churches sometimes. As much as I get annoyed at protestants, especially fundamentalists for their blasted incorrect readings of the Torah and the prophets, at least I understand that their religion is based in the book.
Judaism relies heavily on tradition too (minchag), but it all comes later, and is derived from Torah and prophets, or Mishnah, which is an attempt to distill the commandments from the Torah, and Talmud, which is an attempt to elucidate the Mishnah. Whew. Let me catch my breath.
Oh, I remember that particular litany…
Call: Most pure and chaste Virgin before labor,
Response: Make us meek, humble, pure and chaste, our Lady.
Most pure and chaste Virgin in labor,
(Response)
Most pure and chaste Virgin after labor,
(Response)
… OK, OK, so in Spanish it does rhyme by assonant.
And of course this also led some to believe Baby J somehow teleported out of Mary which is taking it really to extreme (I’d imagine that if anything, under the canon what would happen would be that with Mary being free from Eve’s sin and curse, she would bear forth with no pain or traumatic effects…)
I find it interesting that the response is not “Intervene with God to make us meek…”
Thank you.
So basically, it’s Aramic for “rocket scientist”.
So how is it that when a couple split up, the husband can still deny the wife a “get”? Or does the marriage have to be completely/always unconsummated? Or does she have the right to one if he’s the one who leaves her?
(Apparently men withholding divorce is sufficiently common that Ontario has a law that a man who refuses a religious divorce cannot even be represented in civil court until he provides one)
The word is intercession or advocate. Advocate is also the root of the Romance languages’ words for “lawyer”. You ask them to mediate, or use them as a sounding board; for many people, putting their worries in terms of their side of a dialogue is a lot easier than using other forms of thought. It’s like talking to your dog, but without the woofs, or to your daughter who’s already heard the story a million times minus the “aha… uh-hu… I see…”.
There are Christians through the ages who’ve believed that (Joachim of Flore, famously, in the 13th century), but I don’t think it’s what orthodox/traditionalist understanding would be.
Your point below is quite well taken: people who believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary generally weight tradition equally to scripture, and so they read scripture in a way concordant with scripture. (Even if, as you note, it might not be the obvious way to read the scripture in the absence of anything else).
I’m not really sure why subsequent copyists and scribes didn’t ‘correct’ or gloss ‘brothers’ to read ‘cousins’ or ‘step brothers’, but who knows.
We all have the ear of the deity - ask and you shall receive. But it’s true that Mary and the other saints are considered intercessors as Nava says, pleading for us here who are still struggling through earthly life!